Preparedness for when

moneyistooshorttomention

On a different topic = whew!

Re the world's 12th largest city (and its MEGA BIG) looks like its about to run out of water soon. Like Huh?! Who?! How?!

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-29947965

Doveling

How on earth have their government been able to ignore that situation:eek:
RICE for most of yesterday, foot and leg were not keen on enthusiastic physio exercises:rotfl:

We just have a swiss army knife each anything bigger would frighten me. Bug in for us but I do have an overnight grab bag made up. Still not got round to making copies of birth certificates etc to go in it, must rectify that. Thanks for making me think of it.

Doveling

Karmacat - are you ok again now?
1tonsil - thanks for giving a wave, take care!

RAS

GreyQueen wrote: »

One thing which astonished me about living in the woods in a rainy English September was the sheer amount of calories we were burning. We weren't foraging, we were being catered-for and were frankly eating like pigs inc the nightly cocoa-and-cake and chocolate supplies. We were not hiking nor doing a lot of heavy work. Yet we were all visibly losing weight in just one week.

In the first Ruth and Peter saga (Green Valley) Peter and Alex were working outside and apparently consuming 4,500 calories per day; rather more than the 2,500 for most men today.

moneyistooshorttomention

Part of me is wondering whether the higher amount of exercise alone would account for extra calorie use??

Is there also an element of just "being outdoors" per se that also "consumes" extra calories iyswim (be it having to burn up extra calories keeping warm even if you were just sitting motionless) and/or some other reason??

On the other hand, does anyone know just how many calories are consumed in an hours gardening for instance?

GreyQueen

RAS wrote: »

In the first Ruth and Peter saga (Green Valley) Peter and Alex were working outside and apparently consuming 4,500 calories per day; rather more than the 2,500 for most men today.

It made me realise that we gain the equivalent benefit to a lot of energy from being sheltered by houses, or other buildings, day and night. As in, we aren't required to burn calories in maintaining warmth, and in having somewhere comfortable to sit and lie, we can rest and tick over at a relatively low level.

Everything ultimately comes down to energy, doens't it? I've often been wryly amused at how we have never been more overfed, at least in the global west, whilst having fewer demands on our energy levels. The sheer amount of juice you burn up when doing everything for yourself, from gathering firewood to toting water, is quite astonishing. Wouldn't have been many lardy cases in the neolithic.

Let's say your debris hut or lean-to would take 3 hours to construct. That means you'd have to stop whatever you were doing (travelling? foraging? hiding and praying to whatever deity you believe in that the bad guys won't find you?). You would need to gather and assemble the materials, and allow also time to gather fuel, water, make any other preps which required daylight, all before you could lay you down to rest, and before you lost all the light. You could ameliorate the time factor by staying more than one night in one place, but you would still be making a big commitment.

I can pitch/ unpitch the Banshee 200 in under 5 minutes and it weighs about the same as a bag of sugar. It isn't ideal (no real space to store anything) but it has the advantage of extreme portability and its low profile has seen it happily weather some horrendous weather. And she don't leak, either through the fly or through the groundsheet, as evidenced by the sitting-in-a-puddle experience. If I was buying again, I would go for a slightly bigger small tent (you know what I mean) with space under the fly but not in the sleeping compartment for kit such as boots and pack.

So, a lightweight tent or bivvy, or even a fly-sheet, would save time and the all-important energy every time it was used.

[Deleted User]

Very valid info GQ and sense to use what equipment you have to keep you dry and warm and to save unnecessary outgoings of energy. I was more thinking of a permanent campsite than whilst travelling to a place of security rather than building a new shelter every day. I would make a more substantial shelter if I found a place where I felt safe and take my time over it to make certain of it's weather protection qualities.

Karmacat

Doveling wrote: »

Karmacat - are you ok again now?

Thats kind, thank you! I took Sleepeaze each night, and some anti-inflammatories during the day, and I've just done the minimum, I'm much better thanks. I'd got into a bad habit of bending over at the waist, and "rolling" upwards through my spine, rather than bending down upright and using my thigh muscles to pull me up (anybody else do ballet as a child? full plie is the thing!). I've not been able to do any exercises yet, too much pain, but at least I'm sleeping properly, and I'm on the mend. I'm going to a Reiki course tomorrow, that should help :j

RAS

GreyQueen wrote: »

So, a lightweight tent or bivvy, or even a fly-sheet, would save time and the all-important energy every time it was used.

My main one is a 1-2 person back-packer. I can get a week's worth of supplies plus a sleeping bag and the tent into a 65 litre sack (well the poles in the sac and the "tent" strapped on top). Used to stay a week at a time off-road and sometimes we got to supplement supplies with a loaf IF someone walked out.

Heck of a lot lighter than one I used previously traveling, packing down the Hebrides.

It has been pitched on a site exposed to the SW; and then we got a gale. Of 20+ tents, 4 were still functional; one of which we had turned 180 degrees and another we had to turn 90 degrees because the wind was compressing the canopy onto the rucsacs inside.

I had parked mine butt to the wind despite sacrificing the view and apart from a little spray coming in under the fly, it was dry. A row of large stones windwards would have protected it but they were all holding other tents to the floor!

There was a mass evacuation to somewhere dry. I think I was one of the few with a dry sleeping bag.

There is just enough room for two to sleep but ample for one plus gear and a little space for cooking.

The thing that I really notice when packing alone is that you need almost as much kit as for two and not much more for three. Cooker, fuel, emergency kit, cooking gear, shelter and stuff like water carriers and cameras can all be shared, leaving more space for extra kit (like fishing tackle) and stores.


Edit re energy - I am amazed at how much wind saps "strength". Apart from the cooling effect, the constant adjustment requires effort and energy.

katep23

GreyQueen wrote: »

The sheer amount of juice you burn up when doing everything for yourself, from gathering firewood to toting water, is quite astonishing.

My Dad often quotes (one of) the Archers - "he who chops the wood gets warm twice"!


Separate subject, any recommendations for a really decent multi tool? OH has been dropping really subtle hints - think along the lines of "I really wish someone would buy ME a multi tool".


We're about to move house so it's for general DIY and every day use but would rather get something good which will last.